Psychological Reports, 1984, 55, 115-118. @ Psychological Reports 1984
EMPATHY AND BIRTH ORDER
MIR J A KALLIOPUSKA
U?tiversity of Helsink?
Summary.-Previous conflicting results have been found - i n studying the
relation between empathy and birth order. 194 school students aged 9 to 12
yr. completed an adapted version of the Mehrabian and Epstein scale of
emotional empathy. The social background data including birth order were
gathered during home interviews. The mean differences in empathy for ordinal
positions were not statistically significant, although the difference between
third- and fourth-borns approached significance. It appears that middle-born
children seem more prone to empathize than firstborns.
Considerable data concerning birth order have been gathered, but conflicting results have been reported (Schooler, 1972). It is generally accepted
that firstborns enjoy a more favorable position in the family than later-borns.
They represent the center of attraction for parents and receive extensive time.
Rashba (1975) reported that ordinal positions of 8-yr.-old girls made a
significant difference in perceived maternal warmth. Last-borns received
significantly more maternal warmth as infants and as latency-age children
than did first- and only-borns. Altus (1966) reported that firstborns tend
to be more conscientious and have higher levels of self-esteem than later-borns,
McArthur (1956) noted that firstborns are more sensitive and studious than
second-borns who are more placid, more easy-going, and less studious than
their older siblings. Thompson (1974) pointed out that second-borns may
also be more fun-loving, humorous, and less introverted than firstborns.
Some researchers maintain that family size and altruistic behaviour are
unrelated (Handlon & Gross, 1959; Dreman & Greenbaum, 1973), while
others state that growing u p in a large family promotes generosity (Sawyer,
1966). Other investigators have stated that children from small families may
have a great deal of self-assurance and initiative and are more willing to act
spontaneously to help another child in emergencies (Staub, 1971a, 1971b).
Staub (1971a) noticed that middle or younger children seemed to help a peer
in distress and to share or donate generously. Whiting and Whiting (1975)
observed that only children and the youngest children in a family tend to be
more egoistic than others, seeking more help and attention. They offer less
help and support to their fellow peers. Mussen and Eisenberg-Berg (1977)
stated in terms of social learning theory, that older children are expected to
help with their younger siblings and are frequently rewarded for being
helpful and nurrurant to them. Hamrnersla (1974) in studying college
'Department of Psychology, Division of Applied Psychology, Fabianinkatu 33, 00170
Helsinki 17, Finland.
116
'
M. KALLIOPUSKA
freshmen confirmed that firstborns and only children are prone to help another
person in distress if the required action is quite easy or simple. Bizman with
coworkers (1978) showed that children 5 yr. of age and older in ageheterogeneous kindergartens in Israeli cities and kibbutzim were more helpful
than same-age children with age-homogeneous kindergartens.
Stotland, et al. (1971) hypothesized that birth order in the family is
one determinant of social schemas. Firstborn and only children tended to
respond empathetically to people who differed from them on the dimension
of status, while later-borns related to the similarity dimension by showing
more emotional arousal when the model was a peer or was perceived as
similar to the self. Stotland, et dl. (1978) indicated that on hospital wards,
firstborn nursing students showed a greater tendency to spend less time in the
patients' rooms and more time interacting with fellow workers, in the hallways
and around the nursing station. Later-borns interacted more actively with
patients and stayed longer in the patients' rooms. These data suggest that
later-borns may be more empathetic than firstborns with persons in a dependent situation. Ernst and Angst (1983) have, however, summarized study
reports and have drawn a conclusion that chere is no evidence of superior
empathy in later-borns.
METHOD
Subjects
A group of 194 school children ranging from 9 to 12 yr. of age took
part in the study. They were tested in a group to which each question was
presented orally. Sufficient time for comprehension and answering were
allowed. Social background data including birth order were gachered during
the home interview.
Measwe
The Mehrabian and Epstein's (1972) emotional empathy scale was
modified for children to include only a three-step scale, the alternatives being
completely disagree, disagree and agree to some extent, and completely agree.
The maximum number of points is 99. The internal consistency of the test
for 363 children is indicated by a moderate alpha-coefficient of .68. In this
study scores on the scale of empathy correlated slightly, i.e., .ll,with scores on
the scale of social desirability by Crandall, Crandall, and Katkovsky (1965).
In general, results show that mean empathy scores by birth order did not
differ significantly. Findings are somewhat different from the results of
former investigations in that middle-born children (second- and third-borns)
were prone to empathize more.than firstborns. Fourth- and fifth-borns were
117
EMPATHY AND BIRTH ORDER
TABLE I
EMPATHY:MEANSAND STANDARD DEVIATIONSACCORDING
TO BIRTHORDER
Birth Order
First
Second
Third
Fourth
Fifth
Sixth
Total
M
69.4
70.7
72.4
67.7
66.0
72.0
69.9
SD
8.3
6.5
6.8
6.0
8.4
0.0
7.6
Comparison
n
I06
52
20
11
4
1
194
df
12
t
1,3
1,4
1,5
2,3
24
23
3,4
335
4,5
generally less empathic than firstborns, a n d second- a n d third-borns. It seems
obvious that in large families (4 or more children) t h e youngest children
receive less special parental attention t h a n t h e oldest siblings, because parents
transfer responsibility for caretaking o n t o t h e older siblings' shoulders. In
principle this is a good way t o teach e m p a t h y a n d responsibility t o t h e older
children i n t h e family, b u t within large families parents m a y need to devote
m o r e special t i m e t o t h e younger children.
REFERENCES
ALTUS,N. C. Birth order and its sequelae. Science, 1966, 151, 44-49.
BIZMAN, A., YINON,Y., MIVTZARI,E., & SHAVIT, R. Effects of the a e structure of
the kindergarten on altruistic behavior. J o u m l o f School Psycho&ogy, 1978, IG,
154-160
CRANDALL, V. C., GRANDALL,
V. J., & KATKOVSKY,
W. A children's social desirability
questlonnalre. Joursal of Consulting Psychology, 1965, 29, 27-36.
DREMAN,S. B., & GREENBAUM,C. W. Altruism or sharing behavior in Israeli kindergarten children. Child Development, 1973, 44, 61-68.
ERNST, C.,& ANGST, J. Birth order: its influence on personality. Berlin: Springer,
1983.
H~MERSLA
E. , J. The effects of participation in a laboratory bystander intervention
study on subsequent attitudes and intervention behavior. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Univer. of Washington, Seattle, 1974.
HANDLON, B. J., & GROSS, P. The development of sharing behavior. Journal of
Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1953, 59, 425-428.
MCARTHUR,C. Personalities of first and second children. Psychiatry, 1956, 19, 47-54.
MEHRABIAN,A., & EPSTEIN,N. A measure of emotional empathy. Jourrrl o f Perronaliry, 1972, 40, 525-543.
MUSSEN, P., & EISENBERG-BERG,
N. Roots o f caring, sharing, and helping: the
development of prosociaL behavior in children. San Francisco, CA: Freeman,
1977.
RASHBA, S. J. M. Antecedent conditions in the development of empathy and style of
approach in eight-year-old girls. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of
Florida, 1975.
118
M. KALLIOPUSKA
SAWYER,J. The altruism scale: a measure of cooperative, individualistic and competitive
interpersonal orientation. American Journal o f Sociology, 1966, 71, 407-416.
SCHOOLER,C Birch order effects: not here, not now. Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 78,
161-175.
E. A child in distress, the influence of modeling and nurmrance on children's
attempts to help. Developmental Psychology, 1971, 5 , 124-133. (a)
STAUB, E. The use of role playing and induction in children's learning of helping
and sharing behavior. Child Development, 1971, 42, 805-816. ( b )
STOTLAND,E.. MATHEWS,K. E., JR., SHERMAN.S. F., HANSSON, R. O., & RICHARDSON,
B. Z. Empathy, fantasy and helping. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1978.
STOTLAND, E., SHERMAN, S. E., & SHAVER, K G. Empathy a d b h h order. Lincoln,
NE: Univer. of Nebraska Press, 1971.
THOMPSON, V. D. Family size: implicit policies and assumed psychological outcomes.
Journal o f Social Issues, 1974, 30, 93-124.
WHITING,
B. B., & WHITING.
J. W. M. Children in six cultures: a psychocultural
analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer. Press, 1975.
STAUB,
Accepted June 8, 1984.